IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 24114 of 2010(L)
1. MR.SHIRISH D.LILLADHAR,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :02/08/2010
O R D E R
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
--------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.24114 OF 2010
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 2nd day of August, 2010
J U D G M E N T
~~~~~~~~~~~
The petitioner a dealer registered under the Kerala Value
Added Tax Act, 2003, purchased six rolls of H.D.P.E. Laminated
Fabrics valued at Rs.76,225/- from Ahmedabad. The said goods
were transported by truck from Ahemmadabad to Aleppey and
enroute, the goods were detained at Mangeswar Check Post on
the short ground that the TIN Number of the petitioner was
shown as 302040214075 instead of 32040214075 in Ext.P2
invoice. Thereupon, Ext.P4 notice was issued under section
47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, alleging that
the error in the TIN Number noticed in the invoice is suspicious
and therefore, the genuineness of the documents produced for
the transport and attempt to evade payment of tax are
suspected. By that notice, the petitioner was directed to show
cause against the proposed detention of the goods or to remit
the sum of Rs.8078/- in lieu of detention of the goods and the
vehicle. The petitioner, thereupon, submitted Ext.P5
representation before the Commercial Tax Inspector,
W.P.(C) No.24114/2010 2
Manjeswar expressing willingness to pay the sum of Rs.8,078/-
demanded in Ext.P4 as advance tax and seeking release the
goods against such payment. It is stated that the said officer
refused to accept the original of Ext.P4 expressing inability to
receive the amount demanded in Ext.P4 as advance tax. This writ
petition was thereupon filed challenging Ext.P4 and seeking the
following relief.
“a) Issue a writ of certiorari or other
appropriate writ, direction or order calling for
the records leading to Ext.P4 issued by the
respondent and quashing the same.”
2. I have heard Sri.Premjit Nagendran, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner and Sri.C.K.Govindan, learned
Government Pleader appearing for the respondent. I have also
going through the pleadings and the materials on record. The
only reason stated in Ext.P4 for issuing such a notice is the
mistake in the TIN No. of the petitioner in Ext.P2 invoice.
Instead of 32040214075, the TIN No. was wrongly shown as
302040214075. The error is regarding the 2nd and 3rd digits. It
is for this reason that the respondent doubts the genuineness of
the transaction and also an attempt to evade payment of tax. The
W.P.(C) No.24114/2010 3
tax leviable on the aforesaid goods is only Rs.4,039/-. However,
by Ext.P4 the petitioner was called upon to remit Rs.8,078/- being
twice the amount of the tax as a condition for release of the
goods, failing which the petitioner was required to show cause
against the detention of the goods and the vehicle.
3. In my opinion, as the petitioner is admittedly a
registered dealer and the name of the petitioner appears in
Ext.P2 invoice without any mistake and the only error pointed out
is the mistake in the 2nd and 3rd digits of the TIN No. which were
given in the reverse order, the respondent should have permitted
the petitioner to clear the goods upon payment of the sum of
Rs.8,078/- as advance tax. Such payment would not have disabled
the department from finalising the proceedings initiated against
the petitioner under Section 47 of the Kerala Value Added Tax
Act. On the other hand, even if the final orders were to be
adverse to the petitioner, the payment having been made, the
interests of the revenue would not have bee prejudiced. I
accordingly dispose of the Writ Petition with the following
directions:
W.P.(C) No.24114/2010 4
The respondent shall, on the petitioner remitting the sum of
Rs.8,078/- demanded in Ext.P4 as advance tax with the
Commercial Tax Officer having jurisdiction over the petitioner
and producing proof of such payment, release the goods
described in Ext.P4 to the petitioner. The goods shall be released
on the day the petitioner produces the proof of such payment.
The respondent or the competent officer of the Commercial Taxes
Department shall pass final orders pursuant to Ext.P4 notice,
expeditiously and in any event, within one month from the date of
said release of the goods, after affording the petitioner a
reasonable opportunity of being heard. It is clarified that the
release of the goods and acceptance of the sum of Rs.8,078/- from
the petitioner by way of advance tax will not disable the
department from finalising the proceedings initiated under
Ext.P4. The contentions of both sides on the merits are kept open.
(P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE)
ps